Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (6) TMI 408

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 15, declining to condone the delay of 405 days in filing the appeals, against the final orders in Nos.41234/2015 and 41235/2015, respectively, instant Civil Miscellaneous Appeals viz., CMA Nos.754 and 755 of 2016, are filed. 2. Assailing the correctness of the impugned orders, Mr.L.J.Vengatesh, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that before CESTAT, Chennai Bench, imposition of duty and personal penalty of Rs. 10,37,673/-, were challenged. 3. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, though the order dated 10.09.2013 passed in Appeal Nos.121 and 122 of 2013 dated 10.09.2013, was received by the appellant's tenant on 05.11.2013, it was misplaced by them and thereafter they handed over the same to the appellant in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... emy and Others, reported in (2013) 12 SCC 649 and other decisions referred to in the memorandum of grounds. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that the department's appeal was condoned, with a delay of more than 1000 days. 6. Per contra, inviting the attention of this Court to the reasons assigned in Ground Nos.4 and 5 of the supporting affidavit filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, Mr.S.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, learned Senior Panel counsel submitted that the reasons assigned are not satisfactory and thus, the tribunal has rightly dismissed the condone delay petitions. He submitted that the well considered order of the tribunal need not be interfered with. 7. Heard the learned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... are basically elastic and are to be applied in proper perspective to the obtaining fact-situation. 21.3. (iii) Substantial justice being paramount and pivotal the technical considerations should not be given undue and uncalled for emphasis. 21.4. (iv) No presumption can be attached to deliberate causation of delay but, gross negligence on the part of the counsel or litigant is to be taken note of. 21.5. (v) Lack of bona fides imputable to a party seeking condonation of delay is a significant and relevant fact. 21.6. (vi) It is to be kept in mind that adherence to strict proof should not affect public justice and cause public mischief because the courts are required to be vigilant so that in the ultimate eventuate there is no real fa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r an entity representing a collective cause should be given some acceptable latitude." 10. Reverting to the case on hand, it could be seen that the order impugned is imposition of duty and personal penalty to the tune of Rs. 10,37,673/-. As observed supra, the said order certainly is prejudicial to the interest of the appellant. Though, while dismissing the condonation petition, CESTAT, Chennai Bench, has observed that there is no justifiable cause, going through the reasons assigned, it could be seen that the appellant has not offered a detailed explanation. For brevity, paragraph Nos. 4 and 5 of the reasons assigned in the supporting affidavit to Appeal Nos.E40662 & E40663 of 2015, are extracted hereunder. "4. All the Appellant Directo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondone the delay and following the principles of law enunciated in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we are inclined to condone the delay of 405 days in filing the appeal before CESTAT in Appeal Nos.E.40662/2015-DB and E.40663/2015-DB dated 25.09.2015 on condition that the appellant pays costs of a sum of Rs. 2,500/- in each of the appeals to My Lord the Hon'ble Chief Justice's Relief Fund, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the order made in the instant appeals viz., CMA Nos.754 and 755 of 2016, would stand dismissed, without reference to the orders of this Court. 14. Civil Miscellaneous Appeals, are allowed, as indicated above.  Consequently, the conne .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates